Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - 500A IO-550 Conversion

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

500A IO-550 Conversion

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

floydgm(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 6:11 pm Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

Merlyn Products currently has an IO-550 STC project in the works for the 

500A. Rumor has it anyway.



Mike

Northern Commanders LLC



_________________________________________________________________

Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more….then map the best route! 

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v &ss=yp.bars~yp.pizza~yp.movie%20theater&cp=42.358996~-71.056691&style=r&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=950607&encType=1&FORM=MGAC01

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 8:16 pm Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

Very interesting, Mike.

If you look on the TCFG website (www.aerocommander.com) click on Aircraft

Models > Piston Twins > 500 A Colemill, you will see that I posted a picture

of what I believed at the time to be of a 500A Colemill. The specs, however,

are of a straight 500A because I had nothing on the Colemill. 

You will also see that there are some pictures of a 500B Merlyn with its

four-blade props and all. The specs on the Merlyn page are of a straight

500B because I have nothing on the Merlyn either. (Does anyone have specs

and history on these models?)

Do you know whether what I have on the website are genuine Colemill and

Merlyn mods or are they experimental aircraft? Also, do you know how the

Merlyn would stack up against the Colemill, in your opinion?

Thanks

Nico



--

floydgm(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 8:37 pm Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

I do not know the answers to all of your questions but here is the website I 

have found:



http://www.merlynproducts.com/commander.html



I am in Spokane right now and will find out on Monday what Merlyn is doing.



Mike

Northern Commanders LLC



_________________________________________________________________

Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more….then map the best route! 

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v &ss=yp.bars~yp.pizza~yp.movie%20theater&cp=42.358996~-71.056691&style=r&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=950607&encType=1&FORM=MGAC01

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:29 am Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

Hi Nico,

  

 By clicking on "Aircraft Models > Piston  Twins > 500A Colemill", I couldn't find a photo of the Colemill 500A  (Colemill Super 300), but did find photos of the Merlyn 500B.  (Aircraft Models > Piston Twins > 500B Merlyn).

  

 Let me know the registration of the Colemill 500A  and I'll check it out.

  

 Merlyn Commanders

 The Merlyn 500B pictured is almost certainly s/n  1155-84, N6258X.

 While owned by Jerry W Rodgers and PG&E Inc.,  this had Lycoming TIO-540-J2B(D) 350hp engines with Hartzell HC-C4YR-2UF/FC6660  4-blade propellers, signed-off as installed on August 23rd 1995.

 These propellers are of 69.75 in. diameter, vs.  the usual 80 in. of the standard 500A props.

 Must make for a quieter cabin, unless the  increase in fuselage/prop clearance is eaten away by an extra blade being  involved.

 There were Experimental - Market Survey  Certificates issued on March 14th 1997 and June 11th 1997, before one in the  Standard - Normal category was issued on October 7th 1997.

 Jerry kindly flew me from Nashville to Oklahoma  City in this Commander after the Fly-In in June 1997. He had also attended the  Fly-In held at San Antonio the previous year.

 I think there's now an STC for this, SA5969NM,  covering the 500B, 500U & 500S.

 Model 500S serial numbers 3155, 3255 &  3319 have also had this engine installed.

  

 Model 500B serial numbers 999-30 and 1525-187  have had Lycoming TIO-540-AE2A(MC) 350hp engines with Hartzell  HC-C3YR-2UF/FC8468 or FC8468-6 propellers  installed. This enables a Gross weight increase to 7,200lb under STC  SA01212SE.

  

 I would really like to get some performance  figures for Commanders with these two engines.

  

 Colemill Commanders

 The 500A can be modified to a Colemill "Super  300" under STCs SA340SO and SA366SO. These also approve a GW increase from  6,000lb to 6,530lb.

 (Other 500A Models can have a GW increase from  6,000lb to 6,250lb if Service Change No. 50 is accomplished.)

 Of the 99 examples built of the 500A, at least 21  have been converted to 500B and 31 modified to Colemill "Super  300".

 Additionally, the first of these 99 was converted  to the first Model 680F. (s/n 500A-871-1 to 680F-871-1).

  

 The Colemill conversion replaces the  Continental IO-470-M 260hp engines with Continental IO-520-E 300hp  engines.

 The original Hartzell HC-A2XF-2B/8433-4 propellers are also replaced, with Hartzell EHC-A3VF-2B/V7636D.

  

 Again, some performance feed-back for the  Colemill examples will be welcome.

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry

  

  

 ---

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:00 am Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

Mike,

I visited Merlyn's website and found many interesting things, which answered

some of my questions. I am going to contact these folks for more information

and permission to publish some of their material on our website.

It appears as if these STC's are existing and flying mods. Perhaps if Bilbo

had known about these, he could have had his 500A dressed up in one of

these.

Thanks for introducing me to them. 

Nico



--

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

Thanks, Barry. There’s a lot of useful information from your bunker of Commander intelligence about these products. I would like to incorporate that into the website, with your permission.  

   

I posted my reply to Mike Floyd before I read your email.  

   

Thanks  

Nico  

   

         

  

From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Collman

 Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 5:27 AM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: 500A IO-550 Conversion  

  

     

Hi Nico,  

    

   

    

By clicking on "Aircraft Models > Piston Twins > 500A Colemill", I couldn't find a photo of the Colemill 500A (Colemill Super 300), but did find photos of the Merlyn 500B. (Aircraft Models > Piston Twins > 500B Merlyn).  

    

   

    

Let me know the registration of the Colemill 500A and I'll check it out.  

    

   

    

Merlyn Commanders  

    

The Merlyn 500B pictured is almost certainly s/n 1155-84, N6258X.  

    

While owned by Jerry W Rodgers and PG&E Inc., this had Lycoming TIO-540-J2B(D) 350hp engines with Hartzell HC-C4YR-2UF/FC6660 4-blade propellers, signed-off as installed on August 23rd 1995.  

    

These propellers are of 69.75 in. diameter, vs. the usual 80 in. of the standard 500A props.  

    

Must make for a quieter cabin, unless the increase in fuselage/prop clearance is eaten away by an extra blade being involved.  

    

There were Experimental - Market Survey Certificates issued on March 14th 1997 and June 11th 1997, before one in the Standard - Normal category was issued on October 7th 1997.  

    

Jerry kindly flew me from Nashville to Oklahoma City in this Commander after the Fly-In in June 1997. He had also attended the Fly-In held at San Antonio the previous year.  

    

I think there's now an STC for this, SA5969NM, covering the 500B, 500U & 500S.  

    

Model 500S serial numbers 3155, 3255 & 3319 have also had this engine installed.  

    

   

    

Model 500B serial numbers 999-30 and 1525-187 have had Lycoming TIO-540-AE2A(MC) 350hp engines with Hartzell HC-C3YR-2UF/FC8468 or FC8468-6 propellers installed. This enables a Gross weight increase to 7,200lb under STC SA01212SE.  

    

   

    

I would really like to get some performance figures for Commanders with these two engines.  

    

   

    

Colemill Commanders  

    

The 500A can be modified to a Colemill "Super 300" under STCs SA340SO and SA366SO. These also approve a GW increase from 6,000lb to 6,530lb.  

    

(Other 500A Models can have a GW increase from 6,000lb to 6,250lb if Service Change No. 50 is accomplished.)  

    

Of the 99 examples built of the 500A, at least 21 have been converted to 500B and 31 modified to Colemill "Super 300".  

    

Additionally, the first of these 99 was converted to the first Model 680F. (s/n 500A-871-1 to 680F-871-1).  

    

   

    

The Colemill conversion replaces the Continental IO-470-M 260hp engines with Continental IO-520-E 300hp engines.  

    

The original Hartzell HC-A2XF-2B/8433-4 propellers are also replaced, with Hartzell EHC-A3VF-2B/V7636D.  

    

   

    

Again, some performance feed-back for the Colemill examples will be welcome.  

    

   

    

Very Best Regards,  

    

Barry  

    

   

    

   

    

---

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 7:07 am Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

Hi Nico,

  

 Permission granted - no problem!

  

 Best Regards,

 Barry

 [quote]   ---

KenWHyde(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:32 pm Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

Guys,

  

 When I saw this e-mail regarding the IO-550 conversion, I thought this is  great...then I called a friend who bought a NEW Beech A36 with all the horns and  whistles about 5 years ago and I ask him about the IO-550. The man knows  engines...and he says "I It is the most disgusting, badly engineered piece of  machinery that I can remember buying. I have had to replace at least three  cylinders in 1000 hours and I am now having to replace the whole engine  because corrosion has ruined the cylinders, camshafts and followers. All of this  in spite of following Continental's book recommendations, Flight Safety's  cooling rec's. and changing the oil every 25 hours. It is the worst aircraft  engine I have ever owned and is the first that I've owned since new."

 "Can you believe corrosion on an engine that averages more than 150 hrs a  year. (always hanger kept)

 It never actually broke down in flight!" A friend of his has a A36 plus a  Baron...same engine..lots of problems, Baron making metal both engines. New  airplanes guys. I'm sure others have heard the war stories. Hey, don't shoot  me....I am just relaying the message. 



AOL.com.

  [quote][b]

brcamp(at)windows.microso
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:52 am Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

The IO-550 had a recall just after I bought mine.  They had a number of poorly nickelled cylinders and wanted everyone who bought one to get an inspection, then the bad cylinders would be replaced.  I never thought that would work, since they didn’t keep track of the serial numbers of the bad cylinders, or what engines they went on.  I was, BTW, highly less than thrilled to be exposed to having my factory new engine turn into a field overhaul to new specs at 10 hours operation time. Continental was very clear they really didn’t see that as their problem.  The actual words of the TCM rep at Oshkosh were a very snarky “If you don’t like it, sue us.”   It didn’t come to that because the inspection showed no problem.  

   

I suspect he got some of those bad cylinders, and they didn’t find them in the inspection, or something similar.   

   

Just to be clear, I don’t personally recommend  TCM engines, period. I think their customer orientation and business practices are very poor indeed.  I *do* think that if you are using IO 520s that the IO 550 is a better deal from a number of directions, for essentially the same price. But, if you can upgrade from IO520s to current production Lycomings (500A to 500B conversion+STC(?)) that would be better still.   

   

                    Bruce   

       

From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of KenWHyde(at)aol.com

 Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 6:32 PM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: 500A IO-550 Conversion  

  

  

     

Guys,  

    

   

    

When I saw this e-mail regarding the IO-550 conversion, I thought this is great...then I called a friend who bought a NEW Beech A36 with all the horns and whistles about 5 years ago and I ask him about the IO-550. The man knows engines...and he says "I It is the most disgusting, badly engineered piece of machinery that I can remember buying. I have had to replace at least three cylinders in 1000 hours and I am now having to replace the whole engine because corrosion has ruined the cylinders, camshafts and followers. All of this in spite of following Continental's book recommendations, Flight Safety's cooling rec's. and changing the oil every 25 hours. It is the worst aircraft engine I have ever owned and is the first that I've owned since new."  

    

"Can you believe corrosion on an engine that averages more than 150 hrs a year. (always hanger kept)  

    

It never actually broke down in flight!" A friend of his has a A36 plus a Baron...same engine..lots of problems, Baron making metal both engines. New airplanes guys. I'm sure others have heard the war stories. Hey, don't shoot me....I am just relaying the message.   

  



 

         

  

AOL.com.  

   	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4

      [quote][b]

asgroup(at)tampabay.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:37 am Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

All,



First, I must have missed it, but what airframes is the IO550  

conversion for, and who offers the STC? Thx.



Now, I must comment on the Continental vs. Lyc debate, and we could  

run this forever. But, I'm running a pair of IO550Cs  in our Baron  

that have performed flawlessly over the last 800 hours since new.  

I've also got 1000s of hours behind the 520s and the Lyc TSIO 540s.  

They both have their goods and bads and issues. I've had fairly good  

luck with all of them. I did have to top the Lycs but I haven't had  

but a few cylinders of of the Continental 520 and 470s over ~5000  

hours of operation, and most go beyond TBO. The Continentals seem to  

be more fuel efficient but the Lycs seems to be stronger. Just a  

feeling.... no data.



Food for thought.



Larry Olson

St. Pete

On Aug 24, 2007, at 12:51 PM, Bruce Campbell wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   The IO-550 had a recall just after I bought mine.  They had a  

 number of poorly nickelled cylinders and wanted everyone who bought  

 one to get an inspection, then the bad cylinders would be  

 replaced.  I never thought that would work, since they didn’t keep  

 track of the serial numbers of the bad cylinders, or what engines  

 they went on.  I was, BTW, highly less than thrilled to be exposed  

 to having my factory new engine turn into a field overhaul to new  

 specs at 10 hours operation time. Continental was very clear they  

 really didn’t see that as their problem.  The actual words of the  

 TCM rep at Oshkosh were a very snarky “If you don’t like it, sue  

 us.”   It didn’t come to that because the inspection showed no  

 problem.



 I suspect he got some of those bad cylinders, and they didn’t find  

 them in the inspection, or something similar.



 Just to be clear, I don’t personally recommend  TCM engines,  

 period. I think their customer orientation and business practices  

 are very poor indeed.  I *do* think that if you are using IO 520s  

 that the IO 550 is a better deal from a number of directions, for  

 essentially the same price. But, if you can upgrade from IO520s to  

 current production Lycomings (500A to 500B conversion+STC(?)) that  

 would be better still.



                     Bruce



 From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner- 

 commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of KenWHyde(at)aol.com

 Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 6:32 PM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: 500A IO-550 Conversion



 Guys,



 When I saw this e-mail regarding the IO-550 conversion, I thought  

 this is great...then I called a friend who bought a NEW Beech A36  

 with all the horns and whistles about 5 years ago and I ask him  

 about the IO-550. The man knows engines...and he says "I It is the  

 most disgusting, badly engineered piece of machinery that I can  

 remember buying. I have had to replace at least three cylinders in  

 1000 hours and I am now having to replace the whole engine because  

 corrosion has ruined the cylinders, camshafts and followers. All of  

 this in spite of following Continental's book recommendations,  

 Flight Safety's cooling rec's. and changing the oil every 25 hours.  

 It is the worst aircraft engine I have ever owned and is the first  

 that I've owned since new."



 "Can you believe corrosion on an engine that averages more than 150  

 hrs a year. (always hanger kept)



 It never actually broke down in flight!" A friend of his has a A36  

 plus a Baron...same engine..lots of problems, Baron making metal  

 both engines. New airplanes guys. I'm sure others have heard the  

 war stories. Hey, don't shoot me....I am just relaying the message.





 AOL.com.



   http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listhttp:// 

 forums.matronics.com

 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_- 

 ============================================================ _- 

 forums.matronics.com_- 

 ============================================================

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:41 pm Post subject: 500A IO-550 Conversion

 	  Quote: 	
		     Good Evening Ken,     

   Please do not consider this as being any effort to shoot the    messenger!

    

   However, I very respectfully disagree with the gentleman's impression of    the engine. I think it is far and away the best effort Continental has    produced in the last fifty years.

    

   Having said that, I also feel Continental has suffered greatly from    poor quality control of their products during the past fifteen years or so.    The move from Michigan to Mobile resulted in the loss of a dedicated work    force that has been hard to replace.

    

   If you have a chance to discuss this with the Continental management,    they will agree that there have been some problems, but they are confident    those bad times are behind them.

    

   There was a rash of cylinder problems in the nineties that most    folks will agree was due to a practice of running the engine not rich enough    when at high power settings.

    

   The 550 is capable of putting out a lot of power and it takes a lot of    fuel to keep it cool at those high power settings.

    

   I like to set up a freshly majored 550 at around thirty-one to thirty-two    GPH for the initial takeoff until such time as the fuel balance can be    determined. Once it has been assured that the distribution between the    cylinders is reasonable, I like to see about twenty-nine GPH for a sea level,    standard conditions, takeoff.

    

   Unfortunately, most mechanics seem hesitant to push that much fuel    through the engine.

    

   Rather than get into an argument as to how much fuel is needed to develop    that sort of power, may I tell of my experience with the engine? I had one    installed in my Bonanza at the height of Continental's problem time frame. It    was in 1996.

    

   It was without doubt the best money I have ever spent on any    airplane. The increase in performance was a LOT more than I had    anticipated. That engine currently is ready to be replaced and it has never    had any jug removed. It has suffered from the Continental valve leakage    problems during it's regular compression check, but by following the    Continental recommendations on using a calibrated orifice and checking low    cylinders with a borescope, the engine has easily made it to TBO. I currently    have another 550 being built up by a boutique engine shop to replace the    factory remanufactured one that I first had installed. 

    

   Since that time, two of our sons have purchased 550s that were rebuilt by    a custom overhaul shop and both those engines have performed marvelously    without suffering the low compression readings common with those 1990 through    1999 factory cylinders. It is my understanding that Continental had gone to    the practice of using pre fit valves instead of seating them individually as    had been done in the past.  While that led to bad compression checks, it    did not seem to cause any serious leakage under actual operating conditions.    That is why Continental developed their special Service Bulletin which    includes using the calibrated orifice and the borescope to ascertain the    suitability of continued operation of the cylinders.

    

   There is no doubt that I can find you plenty of folks who will tell you    that the 550 is no good. I can easily find you another couple of hundred users    who think as I do. 

    

   There is also no doubt that the engine does need to be set up properly.    

    

   Most of the earlier Bonanza installations used an Altitude Compensating    Fuel Pump. That system works great, but it takes a bit more care to be    set up properly.  Beech has quit using it. 

    

   A few old line mechanics don't care to learn how to do the setup and that    can cause problems. Continental has a very complete set of instructions and if    they are followed by the operator, the Altitude Compensating Pump works great.    No need to lean on takeoff at higher elevations and altitude changes can be    made without the necessity of constant adjustment.

    

   We who have those pumps and have had then set up as Continental has    advised have had great results.

    

   This has been a bit if a rambling discourse and for that I am sorry, but    as in so many cases of opinions, it is hard to know where to start. As I said    earlier, I consider it to be a great engine. It is light and powerful. When    the fuel control is setup the way the manufacturer suggests, it works    wonderfully. Those folks who chose to run high powers with lean mixtures have    encountered problems, but those of us who have chosen to operate them    within the design parameters have had excellent performance. In fact, we who    operate them at lower powers on the lean side of peak EGT have had exceptional    service from the engines. I would be happy to discuss specifics with anyone    who has the time and the data to share.

    

   The IO-550-B is a marvelous engine!

    

   Happy    Skies,



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

Stearman    N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630    985-8503



    

      In a message dated 8/23/2007 8:33:32 P.M. Central Daylight Time,    KenWHyde(at)aol.com writes:

    



   Guys,

    

   When I saw this e-mail regarding the IO-550 conversion, I thought this is    great...then I called a friend who bought a NEW Beech A36 with all the horns    and whistles about 5 years ago and I ask him about the IO-550. The man    knows engines...and he says "I It is the most disgusting, badly engineered    piece of machinery that I can remember buying. I have had to replace at least    three cylinders in 1000 hours and I am now having to replace the whole    engine because corrosion has ruined the cylinders, camshafts and followers.    All of this in spite of following Continental's book recommendations, Flight    Safety's cooling rec's. and changing the oil every 25 hours. It is the worst    aircraft engine I have ever owned and is the first that I've owned since    new."

   "Can you believe corrosion on an engine that averages more than 150 hrs a    year. (always hanger kept)

   It never actually broke down in flight!" A friend of his has a A36 plus a    Baron...same engine..lots of problems, Baron making metal both engines. New    airplanes guys. I'm sure others have heard the war stories. Hey, don't shoot    me....I am just relaying the  message. 



	


 





Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum